- Joined
- Jun 10, 2009
- Messages
- 27,254
- Reaction score
- 9,350
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Liberal
Please do.
I already asked you to show me and you haven't.
Come on now, let's see it.
As you wish!
My question to you was:
Post # 267 this thread
Originally Posted by Catawba
So you now agree that many working full time making minimum wage need welfare?
and you said:
I didn't say they shouldn't in the first place.
And here are just a few of the places where you have indicated that you do not aggre that "many full time making minimum wage need welfare."
Post #106 on Minimum wage jobs leave millions in poverty.
Harry - So teenagers and other people, who don't need your living wage, should still earn a living wage?
Post #108 same thread
Harry - The entire argument behind this is stupid and shows that people really don't think about what constitutes a "living wage."
What a living wage is based on is, individual/family circumstances, geographic location and current economic considerations.
What a living wage in Boston is, wouldn't be the same for Piedmont, Alabama.
Are we going to adjust these wages based on every one of these considerations?
Any "living wage" would be set on arbitrary factors and wouldn't ever satisfy the needs of some people.
Post #115 same thread
Originally Posted by atrasicarius
So should we just let those people live in poverty instead?
Harry - If it is based on their own lack of motivation, absolutely.
But calling anything "poverty" in the U.S. is a resounding joke.
We already have a **** ton of life style support programs to help those that are, without motivation, have a disability, have too many kids, etc.
Post #199 same thread
Harry - I do not disapprove of a safety net, but a "living wage" that can't even be calculated fairly, is completely useless.
It seems obvious to me your post at the top of the page is dishonest based on your previous statements shown here, but I leave the evidence so that others may decide on their own.
Last edited: